Hybrid icing is a no-brainer. If it keeps one player from being hurt, it is worth it.Mandatory visors with a grandfathering system is also a no-brainer. If it keeps one player from being hurt, it is worth it.Video review on 4-minute high-sticks. Another no-brainer. It takes 15 seconds to get it right. I hope they take into consideration whether a player lifts an opponent's stick into his own face and negate the penalty.Shallower nets aren't that big of a deal. Goalies rarely get beat on wrap arounds now, and I don't see a 4-inch shallower net really changing that too much. A few goals here and there, maybe, but nothing drastic. Give players a little bit more room out there is always a good thing.One thing not mentioned in the article is goaltending equipment. Many of you know my stance on goaltending equipment, for obvious reasons. They want to cut down on goaltending equipment by roughly 10% and have the rules more tailored to the goaltender's specific body/build type.

- Don't really care for hybrid icing. I like the plays where some busts their ass down there to cancel an icing and it generates a scoring chance. But I guess I'll learn to live with this nonsense icing...I'm not sure what it solves, depending on the exact wording of the rules. If it's just a race to the dots, fine, whatever...but I want to see the final wording before I commit to an opinion

- Visors, fine. Indifferent. I don't wear one, if the players feel they need them, fine. It probably makes sense. Indifferent. You gotta lose the helmet if you fight though...

- Video reviewing penalties is an awful thing to do. I will not support that. Especially high sticks of all things? I don't even understand...what does that do?

- Good on the shallower net. I like to use the area behind the net as a coach...changes passing angles near the front, good idea.

- Cut all player equipment down to produce a better game. Nickle and diming the problem with this garbage won't make anything better. Throw down a $20 and be done with it...

I hope they take into consideration whether a player lifts an opponent's stick into his own face and negate the penalty.

never gonna happen. you are responsible for your stick at all times. this is true at every single level of hockey from mites to the NHL.99% of all high sticks are careless/accidental. if you high stick someone on purpose your punishment should be much more than 2 or 4 minutes in the box. below is a prefect example of an "on purpose" high stick:

pfim wrote:Hybrid icing is dumb. Either keep it the same or make it automatic. Officials need less discretion in their roles, not more.

there's discretion in automatic icing. i.e. is the d man skating for the puck? could the d man have played the puck?I had an icing waved off in beer league because my teammate turned away from the puck to start skating back.

I hope they take into consideration whether a player lifts an opponent's stick into his own face and negate the penalty.

never gonna happen. you are responsible for your stick at all times. this is true at every single level of hockey from mites to the NHL.99% of all high sticks are careless/accidental. if you high stick someone on purpose your punishment should be much more than 2 or 4 minutes in the box. below is a prefect example of an "on purpose" high stick:

Kurtis Foster broke his leg in that race for icing a few years ago. I honestly can't think of another significant icing race injury off the top of my head, and I have been watching hockey to where I'd remember it for a good 20 years.

How much does this really improve the safety? "If one less player gets injured" outlook does not seem like a good barometer for whether a rule change should be made.

I agree the reviewing plays will take minutes. That's why I stand against it. They're making football even worse than it already is by examining each play in super slow motion and agonizing over minute details. It's going to slow the game down, no doubt. I feel that the calls even out over time. Even if they didn't, I'd still rather have a faster game, with less stoppages, and have to deal with the occasional blown call where video review would've reversed the decision.

Kraftster wrote:Kurtis Foster broke his leg in that race for icing a few years ago. I honestly can't think of another significant icing race injury off the top of my head, and I have been watching hockey to where I'd remember it for a good 20 years.

How much does this really improve the safety? "If one less player gets injured" outlook does not seem like a good barometer for whether a rule change should be made.

They could save a lot of injuries by outlawing hitting. "If one less player gets hurt" by outlawing hitting, its worth it.

I don't see why getting rid of a dangerous, pointless play that has nearly a 0% chance of changing the outcome of a game is a bad thing. I still haven't seen an arugment that makes me think this is a bad idea.

mikey287 wrote:I like the races for icing because of the chance that can be created from cancelling it...which happens more often than people seem to think...

The races still happen. Forwards are still allowed to beat the d and cancel the icing. The rule gets rid of forwards who are obviously going to lose the race from reaching into the defensemens skates or recklessly shoving him from behind 6 feet from the boards.

But then how does this solve anything...? The only time players get hurt on an icing is if it's close. If you take out the no contests and just keep the close races, the same amount of injuries will occur. Right or no?

I don't think guys get hurt when it's a 50/50 puck. Guys get hurt when a forwards reaches/shoves in desperation. Really, what I want this to solve is the useless reaching forwards do. They have next to zero chance of negating the icing and it's a senseless dangerous play. Look at Pikanen's injury from this year. Brower makes no attempt to play the puck at first. He hooks Pikanen's hands and throws him off balance. Then Fedun's injury from last years preseason. Nystrom is clearly boxed out from touching it and he causes Fedun to lose his balance and break his femur.I'm all for races, but using the hashes and dots as an imaginary line incase a guy loses an edge or something he can still recover before going into the end wall. And these injuries are so much more horrific because when else are guys going full tilt top speed when a collision occurs? Not all that often, but it does happen.